OK, I'm going to possibly open up a can of worms here. 1968 GT350. 60K miles. Known owners all state original engine and had not been out. Car never restored but fixed and painted due to accidents. 302 auto. The Vin on the engine although hard to read in pic MATCHES the trans. block date code. assy date code heads etc all match appropriately to March 13 build. With the grime and original Shelby components on the engine(had autolite carb on AL intake) we have no reason to believe the engine isn't original. So check out the numbers stamped. Has anyone seen anything like this before? Gary
Also the font size is smaller than a reg vin stamp size.
Does the transmission have a tag?
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 07, 2021, 09:46:26 AM
Does the transmission have a tag?
automatic with the VIN stamped. Do automatics have a tag like 4 speeds? Sorry, not well versed on autos since all my cars have been 4 speeds. Gary
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 07, 2021, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 07, 2021, 09:46:26 AM
Does the transmission have a tag?
automatic with the VIN stamped. Do automatics have a tag like 4 speeds? Sorry, not well versed on autos since all my cars have been 4 speeds. Gary
Yes, usually on driver side.
What's the approximate Ford build date of the car?
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 07, 2021, 11:08:28 AM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 07, 2021, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 07, 2021, 09:46:26 AM
Does the transmission have a tag?
automatic with the VIN stamped. Do automatics have a tag like 4 speeds? Sorry, not well versed on autos since all my cars have been 4 speeds. Gary
Yes, usually on driver side.
What's the approximate Ford build date of the car?
actual 3-13-68 which matches good in my opinion with the engine components. As you can see by the grime on the engine with the valve covers and intake I highly doubt this engine was ever out of the car. I have never seen a stamping like that on an engine yet and it sure isn't any variance of a VIN either. Car has the correct 68 BB/Vert frame mounts and insulators on the car also.
The 400 series numbers were usually reserved for Mercury cars. The format looks the same as what we expect although not sure what plant '1' would be and why it would start with a 9 on a '68 dated block.
Would have suggested it's a replacement block, but with the trans having the same numbers, not sure what's going on there.
Check the trans tag for a date code and the rest of the engine casting dates.
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 07, 2021, 11:41:46 AM
The 400 series numbers were usually reserved for Mercury cars. The format looks the same as what we expect although not sure what plant '1' would be and why it would start with a 9 on a '68 dated block.
Would have suggested it's a replacement block, but with the trans having the same numbers, not sure what's going on there.
Check the trans tag for a date code and the rest of the engine casting dates.
that is what we thought. No letters so not a vin. Date codes match up perfectly for the assembly date of the car. It is just weird as when you look at the engine pic it is an engine that was virgin to Feb 1968. Never rebuilt-until just recently-and it matches the trans. Not a high performance engine so pretty much impossible to even blow it up with a C4 behind it.
I'm thinking that the number on the block may be a rebuilders stamping.
My Ford number is 8T02J149308. The block was stamped 8T 149.
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 07, 2021, 03:31:31 PM
.................. No letters so not a vin. Date codes match up perfectly for the assembly date of the car. It is just weird as when you look at the engine pic it is an engine that was virgin to Feb 1968. Never rebuilt-until just recently-and it matches the trans. Not a high performance engine so pretty much impossible to even blow it up with a C4 behind it.
What about this possibility.
When new (possibly before it being sold to the general public) car is stolen and recovered without the engine and transmission. Dealer replaces both with new parts and then sells it to the first owner. No reason to inform the buyer since everything is new and under warranty
Same thing could have taken place with the first owner. Stolen and engine and trans replaced by the insurance company with new Ford parts to insure the warranty
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 07, 2021, 04:51:11 PM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 07, 2021, 03:31:31 PM
.................. No letters so not a vin. Date codes match up perfectly for the assembly date of the car. It is just weird as when you look at the engine pic it is an engine that was virgin to Feb 1968. Never rebuilt-until just recently-and it matches the trans. Not a high performance engine so pretty much impossible to even blow it up with a C4 behind it.
What about this possibility.
When new (possibly before it being sold to the general public) car is stolen and recovered without the engine and transmission. Dealer replaces both with new parts and then sells it to the first owner. No reason to inform the buyer since everything is new and under warranty
Same thing could have taken place with the first owner. Stolen and engine and trans replaced by the insurance company with new Ford parts to insure the warranty
Well the car sat on the dealer's lot for over a year. Date codes on engine all match up correctly. So the car get built at Metuchin and get shipped to Ionia. AO Smith coverts it over. Goes to the dealer and someone steals the engine and trans(who would want a 302 4V C-4?). Dealer orders a replacement. What are the odds that they would get an engine date coded weeks before the car was built at Metuchin? THe stamps appear to be done in a holding fixture as individual stamping of each numeral wouldn't be off the same on all numerals like it is on the block. Could that be an invoice number stamped somewhere for a replacement engine/trans? Shortage when the car went down the line(factory screw up?) and the car went to a holding area for those components? Since every original engine I have seen(not a whole lot) were always stamped wouldn't this combo also be stamped? Remember Feb components and Feb assy date on block. Car built 3-13-68
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 07, 2021, 03:59:03 PM
I'm thinking that the number on the block may be a rebuilders stamping.
My Ford number is 8T02J149308. The block was stamped 8T 149.
So the engine rebuilder is a Ford expert who is now around 80(he is another friend's "go to" guy for 427s and 428s). He tore the engine down. All standard and all factory components(pistons, valves etc) and he said the engine inside was well taken care of and said the engine has never been apart before he rebuilt it. So a rebuild isn't in the cards plus no history of a VIN stamped on either component. It is really just a mystery.
Ford Certified rebuilders here did things like that all of the time. Others did too. Maybe it will show up eventually on an obsolete catalog like Sears?
I don't know at what point peoples memories become so convenient? Maybe it was after their first break up with the High School "steady" and they just wipe out all memories?
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 08, 2021, 08:40:53 AM
Ford Certified rebuilders here did things like that all of the time. Others did too. Maybe it will show up eventually on an obsolete catalog like Sears?
I don't know at what point peoples memories become so convenient? Maybe it was after their first break up with the High School "steady" and they just wipe out all memories?
To be clear when the engine was torn down months ago it was all factory components and showed no signs of a rebuild. assembled like Ford did. The guy who rebuilt it knows his Ford stuff. He is getting up there in age and when he passes on we will lose another one of those rare mechanics who know what's what with our vintage iron. No Ford Vin, again, is on the components but the weird numeral stamping that matches nothing but possibly an invoice....you see the engine. 60K miles. Do you think a 302 and auto would both be rebuilt at the same time and put back into the car to get this grime patina at 60K miles? Car has been off the road since the early 90s also. So a little over 20 years and 60K + miles. I'm sure it is a mystery that will never be solved but I thought I'd give it a chance. My opinion owning a lot of Mustangs? It is the original engine with all the date codes matching up, never rebuilt engine and the patina. What else do we see that would warrant anything else? Nothing in Ford's paperwork(so far) to note a theft or anything else.
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:51:49 AM
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 08, 2021, 08:40:53 AM
Ford Certified rebuilders here did things like that all of the time. Others did too. Maybe it will show up eventually on an obsolete catalog like Sears?
I don't know at what point peoples memories become so convenient? Maybe it was after their first break up with the High School "steady" and they just wipe out all memories?
To be clear when the engine was torn down months ago it was all factory components and showed no signs of a rebuild. assembled like Ford did. The guy who rebuilt it knows his Ford stuff. He is getting up there in age and when he passes on we will lose another one of those rare mechanics who know what's what with our vintage iron. No Ford Vin, again, is on the components but the weird numeral stamping that matches nothing but possibly an invoice....you see the engine. 60K miles. Do you think a 302 and auto would both be rebuilt at the same time and put back into the car to get this grime patina at 60K miles? Car has been off the road since the early 90s also. So a little over 20 years and 60K + miles. I'm sure it is a mystery that will never be solved but I thought I'd give it a chance. My opinion owning a lot of Mustangs? It is the original engine with all the date codes matching up, never rebuilt engine and the patina. What else do we see that would warrant anything else? Nothing in Ford's paperwork(so far) to note a theft or anything else.
The odd block stamping is a sign of a rebuild. The cars only had a one year/12,000 mile warranty. It could have been replaced in 1969.
No engine or trans tag would be unusual on an "untouched" assembly
The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code? The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 08, 2021, 10:17:00 AM
No engine or trans tag would be unusual on an "untouched" assembly
Uh, He has his original Shelby engine tag. It was still attached to the engine when he bought the car(usually misplaced during a rebuild especially if it was done it was done 4 decades plus ago). All castings are good. The Trans? Did you see the pic of it? I told him to clean it to find the tag which I'm sure would be there. He knew where to find the trans stamp and that is why it is in the pic above. So where is the trans tag on a C4? Gary
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 08, 2021, 10:45:36 AM
The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code? The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.
All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical. A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AM
Well the car sat on the dealer's lot for over a year. Date codes on engine all match up correctly. So the car get built at Metuchin and get shipped to Ionia. AO Smith coverts it over. Goes to the dealer and someone steals the engine and trans(who would want a 302 4V C-4?). Dealer orders a replacement.
Just spit balling ideas and possibilities
The long delay of sitting at the dealership so long could be connected with eh loss of drivetrain and the time to recover and replace it.
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMWhat are the odds that they would get an engine date coded weeks before the car was built at Metuchin?
Much better IMHO the closer the incident was to when the car was rebuilt. Maybe a one in six possibility that the replacement was made the same month, possibly, and the original engine
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMTHe stamps appear to be done in a holding fixture as individual stamping of each numeral wouldn't be off the same on all numerals like it is on the block. Could that be an invoice number stamped somewhere for a replacement engine/trans?
Yes it appears that the numbers were placed in a gang stamp and done at the same time unlike the assembly line units were. Plus we have already established they do not fit the plant pattern nor the right size fonts. Leaves us with them being some other tracking number for other purposes
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMShortage when the car went down the line(factory screw up?) and the car went to a holding area for those components? Since every original engine I have seen(not a whole lot) were always stamped wouldn't this combo also be stamped? Remember Feb components and Feb assy date on block. Car built 3-13-68
Car would not have been started (to be built at the plant) until all the major parts were ready and available according to the plant managers I've spoken with. They wanted smooth and fast and taking a chance that something wasn't in place at the start was a no start. Didn't have allot of room to store half finished cars but often used as an excuse my experience
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 08, 2021, 02:00:59 PM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AM
Well the car sat on the dealer's lot for over a year. Date codes on engine all match up correctly. So the car get built at Metuchin and get shipped to Ionia. AO Smith coverts it over. Goes to the dealer and someone steals the engine and trans(who would want a 302 4V C-4?). Dealer orders a replacement.
Just spit balling ideas and possibilities
The long delay of sitting at the dealership so long could be connected with eh loss of drivetrain and the time to recover and replace it.
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMWhat are the odds that they would get an engine date coded weeks before the car was built at Metuchin?
Much better IMHO the closer the incident was to when the car was rebuilt. Maybe a one in six possibility that the replacement was made the same month, possibly, and the original engine
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMTHe stamps appear to be done in a holding fixture as individual stamping of each numeral wouldn't be off the same on all numerals like it is on the block. Could that be an invoice number stamped somewhere for a replacement engine/trans?
Yes it appears that the numbers were placed in a gang stamp and done at the same time unlike the assembly line units were. Plus we have already established they do not fit the plant pattern nor the right size fonts. Leaves us with them being some other tracking number for other purposes
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 08:07:29 AMShortage when the car went down the line(factory screw up?) and the car went to a holding area for those components? Since every original engine I have seen(not a whole lot) were always stamped wouldn't this combo also be stamped? Remember Feb components and Feb assy date on block. Car built 3-13-68
Car would not have been started (to be built at the plant) until all the major parts were ready and available according to the plant managers I've spoken with. They wanted smooth and fast and taking a chance that something wasn't in place at the start was a no start. Didn't have allot of room to store half finished cars but often used as an excuse my experience
Thanks for the help Jeff. So a screw up on engines wouldn't be an issue then. I think this is a mystery that will never be solved. It wasn't uncommon for Shelbys to sit more than a year at a dealership. Also I cannot comprehend someone stealing the car for an anemic 302 auto but who knows. Would a theft be in any records that SAAC or Marti might have?
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 01:15:43 PM
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 08, 2021, 10:45:36 AM
The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code? The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.
All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical. A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html
Right, agree with your comment. Just pointing out that while the numbers/letters don't fit with expected codes, the number of characters is the same as a normal partial VIN stamp.
In regards to originality... I think I remember seeing date codes on original FoMoCo rod/main bearings.
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 08, 2021, 02:39:43 PM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 01:15:43 PM
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 08, 2021, 10:45:36 AM
The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code? The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.
All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical. A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html
Right, agree with your comment. Just pointing out that while the numbers/letters don't fit with expected codes, the number of characters is the same as a normal partial VIN stamp.
In regards to originality... I think I remember seeing date codes on original FoMoCo rod/main bearings.
also the font size is SMALLER than a regular engine stamp and it is obvious they were not individually hand stamped looking at the engine stamp and the upper half of the stamp pretty much missing. I thought replacement but the numbers were on both engine and trans. Then I saw the date codes. The engine builder told my friend all components were factory in the engine. Never apart. Never rebuilt. Really still in good shape. Just weird hence the topic here hoping for some more insight .
Please address why the ID tags for the engine and trans are missing?
If one chooses to ignore certain facts, its hard to take the assessment seriously.
You cant pick and choose which facts are relevant
I would say the burden is on the owner. Find other examples of this oddity or it will remain an anomaly
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 08, 2021, 02:59:38 PM
Please address why the ID tags for the engine and trans are missing?
If one chooses to ignore certain facts, its hard to take the assessment seriously.
WHAT THE F is WRONG with YOU? Trying to stir stuff up? Can you not READ? What ENGINE tag are you referring to other than the one that was MOUNTED to the engine which I told you specifically in a prior post which I also told you that it will be looked at real soon on the trans tag. I'm familiar with a top loader tag but not an automatic. If there is one it will be on it. If you cannot comprehend this post then please refrain because you are adding zero other than drama here. Gary
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 08, 2021, 02:38:04 PM
............. So a screw up on engines wouldn't be an issue then........................
Correct its very unlikely that this engine with these markings was installed on the line or at the car assembly plant based on what I've seen and have been told. And of course why your searching for other possibilities
I would think you could ask Kevin Marti if there was a 1968 automobile with that consecutive unit number "403908" and if so what engine it had.
Like Charles Turner said, this could be from a Mercury. It looks the responses agree this part is a consecutive unit number.
In my experience, the assembly plants often abbreviated the block VIN stamps, leaving out characters that would be physically obvious (like the engine code) given that was the type of engine they were being stamped onto.
91 is a Cougar body code. '68 Cougars were built at Dearborn and San Jose. According to Kevin Marti's Mustang and Cougar tag book, the highest '68 Cougar VINs are:
Dearborn - 587700 range
San Jose - 523500 range
So if I were asking Kevin Marti to run a VIN, it would be either 8F91J403908 or 8R91J403908.
1968 production ended in July. So the subject engine/trans' February 27 assembly date appears to correlate with a 400,000 series build. Keep in mind that the final six digit sequence is not exclusive to a particular car line at a given assembly plant. Units were consecutively serialized across all car lines being produced in that plant for a given model year.
Despite the claims by prior owners, I suspect this assembly was a post original sale transplant from a salvage Cougar, likely done very early in the Shelby's life. The proximity of the engine date to the production date of the Shelby is a coincidence, likely a result of the fact that, in order to get a then current 4 barrel 302, a salvage car would have also been a recently produced unit at the time the swap occurred.
This assertion is supported by the differing style of fonts between those on the subject block and that of VINs stamped at Metuchen Assembly, which produced the '68 Shelbys. Look at the two attached photos. One is the VIN which is the subject of this thread, the other a photo from my file of the block VIN stamp from a '68 GT350.
Note the variations:
- Overall construction of the number - no assembly plant letter on subject as commonly found on Metuchen stamp
Numeral differences:
- "8" top loop is equal to bottom on Metuchen, smaller on top on subject
- "1" has a foot on Metuchen, no foot on subject
- "9" has tighter bottom hook on Metuchen than that on subject
While the reason for the presence of this assembly in a Shelby is unknown, one could speculate that: The car was out of warranty and experienced an engine failure, so the repairer sourced a salvage assembly in order to save money. Or: It could have been a theft, and either the insurance company sourced it for the same reason, Or, the Shelby was sold as a recovered but stripped unit at a salvage auction and the buyer put it together with readily available used parts.
That's my take on it. Bear in mind that certain of our cars endured many abuses before becoming the icons of the muscle car era that we regard them as today.
If this was a Ford VIN we would need to focus on finding what model used the 400000 series and then identify which of the ten Mercury or twenty Ford plants were assigning that range of VIN's in 68
Neither San Jose or Dearborn used the 40000's on Mustangs or Cougars in 68
Unfortunately the books I've opened so far do not include a cross reference for series and models of cars
Did a scan through the few non-Mustang, Cougar and Shelby's I have records of and found that none of the applications below showed up with a sequential number starting with a "4"
68 Mustang
68 Cougar
68 Shelby
68 Falcon
68 Torino
68 Thunderbird
68 Galaxie
68 LTD
68 Cyclone
68 Montego (for future reference those start with a "6")
Trucks, Econolines & Bronco had their own specific pattern different from passenger cars
One thing that has not been addressed is the FONT size. It is smaller than any VIN I have seen on blocks from 68-70. I'm pretty sure the factories didn't have different size stamps in a fixture lying around. What is also interesting is the engine failure aspect. It isn't a 289 HiPo, 428 car with a 4 speed. 302 automatic. In my decades dealing with these cars I have seen more failures of engines with manuals than automatics. One thing nobody mentioned even if we can account for the smaller font size is a mis-stamped vin on a block. But my old 68 the second owner pulled out the 302 4 speed and installed a 428SCJ and automatic(around 1970) and changed out the complete rear end assy to a 69 3.50 TL and 69 Mach1 springs(all stamped/date coded and I still got the 2" drums that have never been cut and measure under 10").Not only is the plant letter or yeart not in the vin but now a body style(91) is? I do like this discussion and appreciate the findings here vso thanks for all the input. The autolite carb on the engine is dated 1 month later than the car. That could easily be a batch of GT350s having their intakes done at the same time at a dealer when the AL intakes became available and carbs being swapped or a warranty carb issue not in SAAC records.
So I have this question for those who have talked to plant workers: Were the blocks and trans hand stamp individually with each stamp hence we see them all over the place? Plant specific?
This engine, trans were definitely stamped in a holding fixture as witness by the perfect in a row stamp on the trans and the top part missing in the perfect row on the engine.
Here is a pic of the engine I put into my GT350. An Atlanta plant 302. Perfect in a row but one number was so light that with paint and the flash it doesn't show up in the pic. Appears to me to be done in a fixture.
QuoteThis assertion is supported by the differing style of fonts between those on the subject block and that of VINs stamped at Metuchen Assembly, which produced the '68 Shelbys. Look at the two attached photos. One is the VIN which is the subject of this thread, the other a photo from my file of the block VIN stamp from a '68 GT350.
It was addressed above
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 09, 2021, 08:15:43 AM
QuoteThis assertion is supported by the differing style of fonts between those on the subject block and that of VINs stamped at Metuchen Assembly, which produced the '68 Shelbys. Look at the two attached photos. One is the VIN which is the subject of this thread, the other a photo from my file of the block VIN stamp from a '68 GT350.
It was addressed above
Well I thought I was clear enough. I guess I wasn't. The pic Bill Collins shows compared to the vin on the 68 block I showed in relationship to the pad it is stamped on are the same size. The trans stamp is a font size smaller. The problem is pics usually do not show their actual size as the trans stamp appear LARGER than it is. I thought I addressed that more than once. I guess the next natural step is to take a scale and use it as reference on the trans to show the actual size of the stamps. Bill's engine font is larger than the trans font even though you cannot see it in the pic due to the closeup shot taken of the VIN for clarity.
Stamps are usually measured in increments in that era. 1/8". 3/16". 1/4".
The 8T stamp is the same as mine. 1/4". It is what was commonly seen on '68 GT350's engine blocks.
As stated, likely just common to the Metuchen assembly plant.
To me it does not look hand stamped. I interpret what I see as some sort of a racked stamp holder with slop in it.
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 09, 2021, 08:41:05 AM
Stamps are usually measured in increments in that era. 1/8". 3/16". 1/4".
The 8T stamp is the same as mine. 1/4". It is what was commonly seen on '68 GT350's engine blocks.
As stated, likely just common to the Metuchen assembly plant.
To me it does not look hand stamped. I interpret what I see as some sort of a racked stamp holder with slop in it.
Back to the font size. I agree that what I see from fender aprons to engine trans stamps are 1/4". The stamps on the engine trans on what I am talking about are 3/16s. I took Bill's Metuchin plant stamp which is the same size as my Atlanta plant stamp which is LARGER than the stamp on this block. See pic as I had to take the original pic and shoot it until I got the spacer plates the same size as reference. Like I said I KNOW stamp size difference by looking at them. I am a tool and die maker by trade and own a lot of stamps.
I'm not sure what the existing issue is now. The block in question has been identified as a non-Metuchin '68 block.
I thought the question had been answered?
I was just agreeing with Collins.
I wouldn't pretend to tell you the details of your profession. ;D
Perhaps you could inquire with someone theoretically knowledgeable of Cougars of the same year and ask for feedback, such as West Coast Cougar?
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 09, 2021, 09:16:50 AM
I'm not sure what the existing issue is now. The block in question has been identified as a non-Metuchin '68 block.
I thought the question had been answered?
I was just agreeing with Collins.
I wouldn't pretend to tell you the details of your profession. ;D
Perhaps you could inquire with someone theoretically knowledgeable of Cougars of the same year and ask for feedback, such as West Coast Cougar?
Nothing is perfect and what has been said about assy line workers over the years? There is a weirdly stamped block and trans. Date codes match up perfectly to the car. The font size of the stamps do not match up nor do those "numbers" attach to anything Ford has done but as Bill mentioned they could be to a Cougar in error? As of now nobody has seen another anomaly like this. The pic in my above post was more for "tired Sheep" than you on the fact that he quoted Bill like my font question was answered which it still isn't probably because nobody has seen one like this. I will be looking online for Cougar Marti reports to see where Vins might fall also if I can find enough. So the next course of action would be as Bill Collins mentioned and that would be to run 8F91J403908 or 8R91J403908. First the Dearborn plant since the car has always been in Mi.
Quote from: Bill Collins on December 08, 2021, 07:44:37 PM
In my experience, the assembly plants often abbreviated the block VIN stamps, leaving out characters that would be physically obvious (like the engine code) given that was the type of engine they were being stamped onto.
91 is a Cougar body code. '68 Cougars were built at Dearborn and San Jose. According to Kevin Marti's Mustang and Cougar tag book, the highest '68 Cougar VINs are:
Dearborn - 587700 range
San Jose - 523500 range
So if I were asking Kevin Marti to run a VIN, it would be either 8F91J403908 or 8R91J403908.
1968 production ended in July. So the subject engine/trans' February 27 assembly date appears to correlate with a 400,000 series build. Keep in mind that the final six digit sequence is not exclusive to a particular car line at a given assembly plant. Units were consecutively serialized across all car lines being produced in that plant for a given model year.
Despite the claims by prior owners, I suspect this assembly was a post original sale transplant from a salvage Cougar, likely done very early in the Shelby's life. The proximity of the engine date to the production date of the Shelby is a coincidence, likely a result of the fact that, in order to get a then current 4 barrel 302, a salvage car would have also been a recently produced unit at the time the swap occurred.
This assertion is supported by the differing style of fonts between those on the subject block and that of VINs stamped at Metuchen Assembly, which produced the '68 Shelbys. Look at the two attached photos. One is the VIN which is the subject of this thread, the other a photo from my file of the block VIN stamp from a '68 GT350.
Note the variations:
- Overall construction of the number - no assembly plant letter on subject as commonly found on Metuchen stamp
Numeral differences:
- "8" top loop is equal to bottom on Metuchen, smaller on top on subject
- "1" has a foot on Metuchen, no foot on subject
- "9" has tighter bottom hook on Metuchen than that on subject
While the reason for the presence of this assembly in a Shelby is unknown, one could speculate that: The car was out of warranty and experienced an engine failure, so the repairer sourced a salvage assembly in order to save money. Or: It could have been a theft, and either the insurance company sourced it for the same reason, Or, the Shelby was sold as a recovered but stripped unit at a salvage auction and the buyer put it together with readily available used parts.
That's my take on it. Bear in mind that certain of our cars endured many abuses before becoming the icons of the muscle car era that we regard them as today.
quick search of 68 Cougar Marti reports: 1968 Dearborn cougar built Jan31, 1968 has VIN 537056 so it cannot be a Dearborn Cougar. I have not found a San Jose one yet in the time frame but with 113,056 Cougars made in 1968 I suspect the "400000" series for a 68 Cougar wasn't used and it started at "500000"?. A Marti report on 9R93X511811 says it was the 11,811th produced car at San Jose on 2-6-68 on this BaT auction so lets rule out that the 400000 series was used for the Cougar. https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1968-mercury-cougar-xr7-19/
I think Cougar vins start with 500,000
The focus is likely on other Ford products
The first two characters are likely not a Cougar bodycode in my opinion
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 09, 2021, 10:22:03 AM
I think Cougar vins start with 500,000
The focus is likely on other Ford products
The first two characters are likely not a Cougar bodycode in my opinion
Correct on the 500000. I did a BaT search of Cougars and found a Marti proving it. 91 is a base Cougar code as is 93 is an upgraded model(XR-7).
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 09, 2021, 10:22:03 AM
I think Cougar vins start with 500,000
The focus is likely on other Ford products
The first two characters are likely not a Cougar bodycode in my opinion
Wayne plant for full size Galaxie platform started at 100000. Lorrain(Torinos) plant possibly 100000 and definitely not 400000. Atlanta plant 100000. Seems to be a pattern: 100000 for Fords and 500000 for Mercs. Google and Marti reports show this as well as BaT cars for sale.https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1968-mercury-comet-sports-coupe/ .
I wonder if the ford strike that happened in 68 had anything to do with this car as the plant was shut down for awhile. Was the strike at 1 plant only dearborn wasnt it ?
Quote from: Special Ed on December 09, 2021, 10:44:03 AM
I wonder if the ford strike that happened in 68 had anything to do with this car as the plant was shut down for awhile.
I could check Sheet Metal dates but March 13 build and later original quarters. So my latest research shows that the stamped numbers have no correlation to Mercury or Ford as it pertains to consecutive unit VIn numbers on cars. Trucks have only 5 consecutive numbers at the end.
Strike was in late 67, very unlikely to have effected a February built car
Really one call to Marti should resolve which Fords used 400000 series numbers
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 09, 2021, 10:50:55 AM
Strike was in late 67, very unlikely to have effected a February built car
Really one call to Marti should resolve which Fords used 400000 series numbers
Ford didn't. Don't need to call Marti. Just look at the Marti reports for 1968. He generally tells-but not always- "Vin 123456 "your Ford was the 23456th model made at that plant or 567890 "your Mercury was the 67890th model made at that plant. Enough Marti reports out there for Mustangs, Cougars, Torinos, Comets, Galaxies, Bronco and F-150s to show that. Besides Marti has not been taking phone calls as they have been behind for some time not last I heard. Here is what you would find for 1968 if you looked at the VIN plate. Hey I have learned a lot about this today.
I've sent Kevin a message asking if any 1968 Ford cars made with 400xxx numbers.
Found this on the web:
SIXTH THRU ELEVENTH DIGITS - Consecutive Unit Number (Numbers):
Ford = 100001-399999 (1960-1969)
Ford = 100001-399999; 600001-899999 (Dearborn Assembly; beginning in 1965 due to the popularity of the Ford Mustang. Highest documented was 806693)
Lincoln = 400001-499999 (1960-1966)
Lincoln = 800001-899999 (1967-1968)
Lincoln = 848001-899000 (1969 only)
Lincoln = 999001-999999 (1964-1969 Sedan models for conversion to Lehmann-Peterson Limousine only)
Mercury = 500001-799999 (1960-1969 Mercury, except 1960-1961 Comet)
Comet = 800001 - 999999 (1960-1961 Comet; Originally intended to be part of the Edsel line, which was discontinued early in the 1960 model year. The name Mercury does not actually appear on the car)
Well I would say if there werent any, we can surmise the sequence does not directly relate to a specific car ( either intentionally or unintentionally)
Then we still need to examine the trans tag and see if it is consistent with a 68 Shelby.
I think without some other similar examples, you will never get past "maybe". Its not really critical on a Shelby because the non matching number cars are not sufficiently devalued
Just an opinion, but it looks like the discussion has at least established the numbers on the block and trans are not something applied at one of the car plants in 1968 and for this car originally. Leaving us only with possibilities but no confirmation at this time and until we find another example marked in the same fashion
Kevin replied and noted that there were no 400x series unit numbers for '68... so I guess we can scratch that.
With them being a different size than the normal partial VIN stamps, I guess we are back to the possibility of them being a rebuilder stamp or for some other use.
Guess one question that came to mind is if the car was ever out of the USA?
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 09, 2021, 03:37:47 PM
Kevin replied and noted that there were no 400x series unit numbers for '68... so I guess we can scratch that.
With them being a different size than the normal partial VIN stamps, I guess we are back to the possibility of them being a rebuilder stamp or for some other use.
Guess one question that came to mind is if the car was ever out of the USA?
Thank you Charles for getting in touch with Kevin. No, the car has not traveled far. Sold new in Grandville Mi, then came to the east side of the state so all owners within a 200 mile radius. Here is the transmission tag pic. Not to beat a dead horse but the rebuilder-a longtime Ford expert who is around 80sh- said the engine was original and never rebuilt when he tore it apart. 60K mile car.
Well PEES is the correct type of trans
I think the tag also has a date code? But, I am not sure.
The components are correct, but saying they are original to the car I dont know?
I did notice some ghost stampings on that transmission too, but I cant provide an explanation
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 10, 2021, 06:46:49 AM
Well PEES is the correct type of trans
I think the tag also has a date code? But, I am not sure.
The components are correct, but saying they are original to the car I dont know?
I did notice some ghost stampings on that transmission too, but I cant provide an explanation
I see what appears to be C 11 then the bolt hides a character on the tag. Incidentally rebuilders generally do not reinstall tags after rebuilds or install their own tags and that is why with the engine and trans still sporting their original tags is interesting. I saw what appears to be an 8 halfway over the zero and that is it. very light on an angle. the housing is virgin metal so obviously not a full stamp over a stamp with no other visible characters. I have checked out the block and trans surfaces for evidence of tampering of the surfaces and found none. Pics pretty well call that out.
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 09, 2021, 01:51:37 PM
Just an opinion, but it looks like the discussion has at least established the numbers on the block and trans are not something applied at one of the car plants in 1968 and for this car originally. Leaving us only with possibilities but no confirmation at this time and until we find another example marked in the same fashion
I know the prior owner of this car. Appears in the SWR as 1994 registering the car with SAAC. It was a dirty unrestored car with it's share of battle scars and some Mi rust when he bought it. The patina and prior owners the car had the original engine and trans. I am not sure of how many owners from new but it isn't more than 4 I think(second owner bought off of Wyoming Mi owner and brought it to our area 130-140 miles from there to our area). I think around 65K miles when bought in 1994 and then torn apart and sat until my friend bought it. When my friend bought it the area was so grimy you could NOT see the numbers on the engine and trans so the prior owner who pulled the combo out of the car before he sent the car out for metal work never touched the engine or trans cleaning wise. When I first saw the car about a year before my friend bought it to me the engine had the patina of being the original especially the way it was dressed in Shelby trim and dirty as shown in my pic in a prior post. The seller who we knew had no reason to believe it wasn't the original engine. The prior owner owns 2 W -code 68 Cougar XR-7s and a 67 R-code Comet and knows his cars. I was hoping this post would bring some light to those numbers. If anything that looks to be a "order code" or invoice code of some sorts. We could have easily left those codes as a mystery and stamped the vin on the trans but that is not how we roll(I would NEVER restamp any engine or trans). We want to get to the bottom of this if possible. Looking at the warranty work on the car there is nothing to show anything to a replacement engine trans. Hit the dealer in May of 68.Work done at dealer on 10-31-68 with 4 miles on it. 4/14/69 car was sold new. 4/23/69 first owner warranty work for a window regulator at 417 miles. Car sat on dealer lot for over 11 months. I also think it isn't all that big of a deal on original engine trans but my friend with his stable of cars loves originality. So I told him I'd try my best to find out why this is like this and
APPRECIATE all the input you guys have put it. Thanks. Gary
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Sherlock Holmes
THE BLOCK ISN'T ORIGINAL TO THE CAR.
You seem to prefer the self flagellation method? ::)
There is an "acid method" that you probably should use here in this case on the block to see if there is an original stamping that was machined off?
I don't know how you do it but it has been "quoted" as used in other references in valuable theft recovery procedures.
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 10, 2021, 08:03:29 AM
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Sherlock Holmes
THE BLOCK ISN'T ORIGINAL TO THE CAR.
You seem to prefer the self flagellation method? ::)
There is an "acid method" that you probably should use here in this case on the block to see if there is an original stamping that was machined off?
I don't know how you do it but it has been "quoted" as used in other references in valuable theft recovery procedures.
Hmm can you prove that? That is the problem here. Acid method? HMM are you assuming someone somehow took original Ford stamped VIN numbers off of the block and trans case and somehow created a virgin surface when done 4-5 decades ago? You don't have all the answers so the easy one is to type in capitals it isn't original.....area machined? How many times do I have to say the engine has not been apart before? DATE CODES ALL MATCH. Actually only 3 owners of the car. 1st one is dead. Second one pulled the dirty drive train out of it. So lets see the 50 year old first owner had the vin numbers machined off the surfaces and they would have to be in the 60s to early 70s as witness by the patina of the engine when pulled in the early 90s(was in his 70s when he sold the car). This isn't a car that has had 30 owners and had been restored 10 times. Just an anemic 302 auto Shelby that was used by the original owner from 1969 until he sold it to the second owner in 1994. Original Owner died in 1997 according to a Mi obit search using SAAC records on who the OO was.
Oh, yeah about machining. Pretty obvious that this aluminum transmission case area has never been machined so no reason for an acid test.
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 10, 2021, 11:15:01 AM
Quote from: shelbydoug on December 10, 2021, 08:03:29 AM
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Sherlock Holmes
THE BLOCK ISN'T ORIGINAL TO THE CAR.
You seem to prefer the self flagellation method? ::)
There is an "acid method" that you probably should use here in this case on the block to see if there is an original stamping that was machined off?
I don't know how you do it but it has been "quoted" as used in other references in valuable theft recovery procedures.
Hmm can you prove that? That is the problem here. Acid method? HMM are you assuming someone somehow took original Ford stamped VIN numbers off of the block and trans case and somehow created a virgin surface when done 4-5 decades ago? You don't have all the answers so the easy one is to type in capitals it isn't original.....area machined? How many times do I have to say the engine has not been apart before? DATE CODES ALL MATCH. Actually only 3 owners of the car. 1st one is dead. Second one pulled the dirty drive train out of it. So lets see the 50 year old first owner had the vin numbers machined off the surfaces and they would have to be in the 60s to early 70s as witness by the patina of the engine when pulled in the early 90s(was in his 70s when he sold the car). This isn't a car that has had 30 owners and had been restored 10 times. Just an anemic 302 auto Shelby that was used by the original owner from 1969 until he sold it to the second owner in 1994. Original Owner died in 1997 according to a Mi obit search using SAAC records on who the OO was.
Yes CAPS! YOU ARE STILL MISSING THE POINT.
I heard a story from my friend the Rabbi. There was this guy, some say a Jewish guy, floating in the ocean with no one around to help him. So he prayed to God for help.
Along came a whale and said, "need a ride?'. He replied, "no, God will save me".
Along came a GIANT Eagle, swooped down and said, "I can help!", the man said, "No God will save me".
Finally a helicopter came, lowered a rope ladder. He waived it off yelling, "God will save me!"
He drowned. Fortunately went to Heaven? Probably because God wanted to know why he refused his help.
In frustration he asked God, "why didn't you save me?" God replied, "I sent you a whale, an eagle and finally a helicopter? What's to do?"
My friend is a Reformed Rabbi. He wouldn't tell me what the guys name was or why he was out floating in the ocean. He didn't want me to miss the point?
C 11 is the date, so March 11... assume '68. This lines up with the April castings on the block.
I'm not sure we will ever know for sure why those numbers are stamped there. Maybe some other cars will turn up with something similar... and doesn't have to be Shelby's... Mustangs built around the time period would probably yield more samples to compare.
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 11:47:31 AM
C 11 is the date, so March 11... assume '68. This lines up with the April castings on the block.
I'm not sure we will ever know for sure why those numbers are stamped there. Maybe some other cars will turn up with something similar... and doesn't have to be Shelby's... Mustangs built around the time period would probably yield more samples to compare.
Thanks Charles. mid to late Feb castings on the block, heads. March 2 on the engine tag(Feb 27 assy stamp on block). Trans tag is stamped march 11 or is that March 1 and the 1 is something else after that? March 11 would be 2 days before car was assembled in Metuchin(Marti says March 13th). Too close? Are there cast dates on Automatic trans? While some seem to think I am missing some point I wonder if there are other cars out there and others are afraid to even bring it to light thinking they might have gotten the same responses I have gotten from a few here. Gary
I checked some other C4 tags and that date code is 8C11, would be followed by another number, assuming a shift code. So, yes, March 11, 1968.
If the actual build date of the car was March 13, that would be very tight.
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 12:55:58 PM
I checked some other C4 tags and that date code is 8C11, would be followed by another number, assuming a shift code. So, yes, March 11, 1968.
If the actual build date of the car was March 13, that would be very tight.
+1 Given the need to assembly the transmission, load and ship , unloaded at the plant, inventoried and so on it from the transmission plate to Metuchen not sure that the date supports any claims of being original
Wasn't the plant in the south somewhere? Don't have that document handy at the moment
Agree a mystery (the marking of the block and trans with the number) until we get other examples or something solid turns up
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 02:05:48 PM
Wasn't the plant in the south somewhere? Don't have that document handy at the moment
Sharonville, OH
I dont recall c6 trans tags being date coded but a trans serial# instead i thought so was c4 trans tags date coded as that tag is a B (not an 8 ) in front of c11 so was that trans a c8zp-b id #
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 02:13:12 PM
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 02:05:48 PM
Wasn't the plant in the south somewhere? Don't have that document handy at the moment
Sharonville, OH
Thanks for the clarification. Knew you would remember :)
Quote from: Special Ed on December 10, 2021, 03:02:03 PM
I dont recall c6 trans tags being date coded but a trans serial# instead i thought so was c4 trans tags date coded as that tag is a B (not an 8 ) in front of c11 so was that trans a c8zp-b id #
Here is an example from a 68 Mustang Shows the month and day of month and printed in reverse from earlier 65-66 tags
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-101221171410-16521847.jpeg)
so would it be f17 or 17b date?
Quote from: Special Ed on December 10, 2021, 06:40:41 PM
so would it be f17 or 17b date?
"F17" = June 17th
"B" would be the shift
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 12:55:58 PM
I checked some other C4 tags and that date code is 8C11, would be followed by another number, assuming a shift code. So, yes, March 11, 1968.
If the actual build date of the car was March 13, that would be very tight.
It is a 7+ hour drive from Cleveland to Metuchin for engine deliveries. Where were the trans made? There is no "8" in front of the C. There is a C8ZPB then C 1 1 then the bolt is possibly hiding a character and I'll have him pull the tag to see but appears to be a B. Even back then there was just in time deliveries. If a car is built early I would suspect more lead time on date components but if a car is built on time or late it could mean it was waiting for components and a trans is a component. Not unreal or impossible. Engine tag says C2 but build on the engine itself is 2-27 by the assy stamp on the block. Both have the same codes on it. Here is more fodder on the engine: The clips on the valve covers still had the BLUE paint on them. The engine appeared concours correct used dirty before it was tore down for the rebuild. The components are date coded also. Rods are Jan. He built a stroker so he kept all his original components so he has all the original rods pistons cranks and camshaft. All Ford. All date coded to a factory Feb build so I'm in my opinion it was an untouched engine and not a rebuild. This trans was specific for a 302 Mustang only. How many 302 4V autos did they build in 1968? Next is to find the date codes on the casting. If Sharonville was the plant that produced the trans it is a 9 hour drive from that city to Metuchin.
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 05:18:45 PM
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 02:13:12 PM
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 02:05:48 PM
Wasn't the plant in the south somewhere? Don't have that document handy at the moment
Sharonville, OH
Thanks for the clarification. Knew you would remember :)
Quote from: Special Ed on December 10, 2021, 03:02:03 PM
I dont recall c6 trans tags being date coded but a trans serial# instead i thought so was c4 trans tags date coded as that tag is a B (not an 8 ) in front of c11 so was that trans a c8zp-b id #
Here is an example from a 68 Mustang Shows the month and day of month and printed in reverse from earlier 65-66 tags
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-101221171410-16521847.jpeg)
With all the sleuthing over the years has there even been a data base with cars actual build dates along with the corresponding "tag" dates for components like engine, trans, sheet metal. If not this could be an important look into Ford's practices. Problems etc. Of course on untouched "documented numbers matching cars". On the B2 forum they have found a few cars with blocks cast months before the car was built. What about components that are built a few days before car assy when parts become bottle necks in the system. A factory with a shortage of 351C 2V engines in 1970 might see engine tag assy dates real close to the car's assy. I have heard stories of the 351C 2V in 1970 that is why I mention this. My friend owns a 70 Mach1 H-code original paint interior etc survivor with the 2V Cleveland in it. Just had it built at Roush and pulled 330HP on the dyno with a holley 2V on it. Jack showed up saw the performance and asked what was in the engine(cam pistons), what was done to the heads and asked them to use an adapter and put a 4 V on it. Pulled a lot more HP out of that engine. The way the heads were rebuilt, new guides installed and the ports "flash" ported was really interesting as it was done on a high tech laser machine and it did the job real fast. That is why Roush's quoted price to build the engine was much less than other "old" tech engine shops in the area when dealing with the canted valves.
I agree not impossible. But, not likely...
You originally asked what other people thought. Now you're trying very hard to persuade them.
Find some other examples of a super tight window. I am sure you can find cars from the same DSO. They will have automatic transmissions and there is a high probability they will be originals.
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 11, 2021, 07:36:27 AM
I agree not impossible. But, not likely...
You originally asked what other people thought. Now you're trying very hard to persuade them.
Find some other examples of a super tight window. I am sure you can find cars from the same DSO. They will have automatic transmissions and there is a high probability they will be originals.
did you read my post and see I asked if anyone had charted documenting numbers matching engines and trans compared to the dates of the cars along with sheet metal? I also mentioned that on the B2 forum they found blocks that were used months later. I'm not trying to persuade anyone here. I'm just trying to find out all possible scenarios and like with the numbers someone here could have a tight time frame or a chart showing patterns of built components to car assy dates. Bottom line the tag was stamped on a Monday and car was built on a Wednesday assuming all records are correct. That is why now I want to find other C4 equipped 302 Mustangs from Metuchin or Dearborn with trans codes VS Build dates. It is easy to DISMISS something than to do a lot of hard work to come to a more accurate conclusion wouldn't you say? I know we are talking 1968 here but working in the auto manufacturing arena since 1985 our components do not sit around. They get built crated/racked and moved to the docks where trucks show up every day for shipment. At one point right out of bankruptcy I drove a HiLO for 3 weeks and our assembled components I would bar code tag with a date code and I would move them to the docks and stack the racks. Parts were generally gone the same day out the door. My leader loaded the trucks. We would hydroform Corvette frame rails and ship the same day or load on a rail car but in those we were stock piling since they were moving the rail operations to Canada so were were building more than they needed so they had stock for the transition period of the dies and stamping process to be finished in Oshawa. What becomes difficult is if the assy plants rotated their stock of components as it came in the door.
I read all your posts. What I see is a lot of hostility, because no one that responded in this thread will support your agenda.
Quote from: Tired Sheep on December 11, 2021, 08:52:29 AM
I read all your posts. What I see is a lot of hostility, because no one that responded in this thread will support your agenda.
LOL what I see from you is a person who appears not to read and wants to start crap. No hostility. It isn't my car. Told my friend I'd try and get to the bottom of it. You have added nothing here but opinions. Those who know me know that I am diligent on trying to uncover everything and not assume anything and I'm NOT a hostile person. Too bad SAAC 1.0 isn't around as I have had lively discussions on 69-70 Shelbys where experts have told me I was wrong only to have info come out(period pics and those who did things are GREAT resources) to prove I was right and have seen others change their stance and others have been quiet from their initial "that wasn't the way it was" posts. It is no wonder others have left this forum. I will continue on this journey and if it bothers you as it appears to do just turn off the notifications to it. Gary
What am I starting?
You are ignoring the facts because you have mind made up already.
What about the different sized fonts and character shapes pointed out earlier? You choose not to see that
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 11, 2021, 07:27:15 AM
With all the sleuthing over the years has there even been a data base with cars actual build dates along with the corresponding "tag" dates for components like engine, trans, sheet metal. If not this could be an important look into Ford's practices. Problems etc. Of course on untouched "documented numbers matching cars"..................
Yes at least a number of people have collected and organized this sort of information for their use. Sometimes they include allot more data points than just what you listed. Surprisingly some started recording data back in the 60's-70's for certain types of cars
Remember that if your comparing Boss 302's built at Dearborn (often not identified in those discussions) the date spreads really IMHO don't apply to your situation.
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 11, 2021, 01:41:05 PM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 11, 2021, 07:27:15 AM
With all the sleuthing over the years has there even been a data base with cars actual build dates along with the corresponding "tag" dates for components like engine, trans, sheet metal. If not this could be an important look into Ford's practices. Problems etc. Of course on untouched "documented numbers matching cars"..................
Yes at least a number of people have collected and organized this sort of information for their use. Sometimes they include allot more data points than just what you listed. Surprisingly some started recording data back in the 60's-70's for certain types of cars
Remember that if your comparing Boss 302's built at Dearborn (often not identified in those discussions) the date spreads really IMHO don't apply to your situation.
agree 100 percent. anomalies are generally plant specific. I do not think you will find "MADE DE MEXICO" stamped on a latch support on a Dearborn car but you will on a SJ car. Have you seen that Jeff? it was on a SJ R-code Mach1 I restored 30 years ago.
Here's a couple examples of a '68 C6 from an R code. No date code, just a transmission part number and transmission serial number.
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 05:18:45 PM
Quote from: CharlesTurner on December 10, 2021, 02:13:12 PM
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 10, 2021, 02:05:48 PM
Wasn't the plant in the south somewhere? Don't have that document handy at the moment
Sharonville, OH
Thanks for the clarification. Knew you would remember :)
Quote from: Special Ed on December 10, 2021, 03:02:03 PM
I dont recall c6 trans tags being date coded but a trans serial# instead i thought so was c4 trans tags date coded as that tag is a B (not an 8 ) in front of c11 so was that trans a c8zp-b id #
Here is an example from a 68 Mustang Shows the month and day of month and printed in reverse from earlier 65-66 tags
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-101221171410-16521847.jpeg)
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 12, 2021, 08:19:37 AM
......................I do not think you will find "MADE DE MEXICO" stamped on a latch support on a Dearborn car but you will on a SJ car. Have you seen that Jeff? it was on a SJ R-code Mach1 I restored 30 years ago.
Never. Would have liked to see that. Was it metal stamped or just ink? Wonder if it was a service replacement of some form.
Quote from: Royce Peterson on December 12, 2021, 10:33:18 AM
Here's a couple examples of a '68 C6 from an R code. No date code, just a transmission part number and transmission serial number.
Agreed that period C6's carried a different style tag but since the focus is on C4 posted just one of those.
Not sure if C6's were assembled at the same transmission plant or a different one. Tag would suggest a different one